|
10-11-2016, 10:54 PM
|
#1
|
Member
Name: Mark
Trailer: Coleman and Bigfoot
British Columbia
Posts: 33
|
New Trailer time - Lance 1685 vs Bigfoot 25B21FB
Hi Everyone
I'm planning my move to a hard sided from my tent trailer.
My Wife and I have landed on 2 units that seem to check all out our boxes.
I'm looking for real world pros and cons to these units from people who have actually used them.
Thanks !
|
|
|
10-12-2016, 02:41 AM
|
#2
|
Senior Member
Name: Dave
Trailer: Casita SD17 2006 "Missing Link"
California
Posts: 3,738
|
Welcome to FGRV Mark. This site is aimed towards molded fiberglass TT's. Basically two FG half shells with no interior support from wood or steel. Can you give a little more info for what you're looking for and what your tow vehicle is going to be so we can have better answers for you. You'll get a lot of comments as many of the members here came from a tenting past.
|
|
|
10-12-2016, 08:20 AM
|
#4
|
Senior Member
Name: Jon
Trailer: 2008 Scamp 13 S1
Arizona
Posts: 11,962
|
I haven't looked up the Lance but I expect the Bigfoot will be heavier as well as more expensive. It's a four-season trailer- extra insulation, double pane windows, enclosed, heated holding tanks. Very well made and all the advantages of molded fiberglass.
As has been said, we're biased here in favor of molded fiberglass construction. If the cost and weight don't bother you, I'd say Bigfoot all the way...
If not, have you looked at the lighter, less expensive Escape 21? It would be my own first choice in that size class. It does mean accepting a wet bath, but in my mind that's a small sacrifice to keep it smaller and lighter.
Best wishes whatever you decide!
|
|
|
10-12-2016, 09:06 AM
|
#5
|
Commercial Member
Name: Charlie Y
Trailer: Escape 21 - Felicity
Oregon
Posts: 1,584
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon in AZ
I haven't looked up the Lance but I expect the Bigfoot will be heavier. It's a four-season trailer- extra insulation, double pane windows, enclosed, heated holding tanks. Very well made and provides the seamless advantage of molded fiberglass. I'd expect it to be more expensive, too.
As has been said, we're biased here in favor of molded fiberglass construction. If the cost and weight don't bother you, I'd say Bigfoot all the way...
Have you looked at the lighter, less expensive Escape 21? It would be my first choice in that size class. It does mean accepting a wet bath, but in my mind that's a small sacrifice to keep it smaller and lighter.
Best wishes whatever you decide!
|
That was our decision when upsizing from a Casita 17 - the Lance 1685 (which we took out for a test tow) and the Escape 21. Did not like towing that wide boxy Lance compared to the fiberglass.
Go visit their models - they're in BC too!
|
|
|
10-12-2016, 12:33 PM
|
#6
|
Senior Member
Trailer: 2005 Casita Spirit Deluxe 17 ft (was 2003 16 ft Scamp)
Posts: 427
|
Mark
Wondered why you would choose the Bigfoot front bed vs. back bed. The floor area of rear bed is much bigger.
|
|
|
10-12-2016, 09:11 PM
|
#7
|
Member
Name: Mark
Trailer: Coleman and Bigfoot
British Columbia
Posts: 33
|
Hey All
Thanks for the replies. I'll try to answer them all.
First off my preference is the Bigfoot, Oliver would be on the list if they were easier to get, but Bigfoot vs Lance is still debated in the house hold.
I'm driving a Tundra 5.7L my tow cap is 10000lbs. I'm trying to keep the trailer under 6000lbs. My main concern is durability/leaks, I live in Vancouver BC, it rains a lot here. The trailer I have is a Evolution E1 (off road tent trailer), I spend a lot of time boondocking in the back country, so on top of the rain the trailer will be pulled into some nasty spots.
I live 45 minutes from the Escape factory, we stopped by a couple weeks ago. We didn't love the interior of the Escapes.
And for some odd reason my wife hates the rear bed bigfoot.
Mark
|
|
|
10-12-2016, 11:49 PM
|
#8
|
Member
Name: tony
Trailer: Bigfoot 25B21RB
British Columbia
Posts: 72
|
lance vs bigfoot
I can only comment having owned 2 Lance truck campers and 2 Bigfoot trailers. I know I'm not comparing apples with apples but we do find the Bigfoot warmer inside, sturdier and it gives a secure feeling camping out in the roughest weather. We live in Abbotsford about an hour east of Vancouver and enjoy our 21' rear bed Bigfoot in all weather. I'm heading to Croatia next week and I know if I could export these to Europe they would sell well. I'm surprised more people have not understood or appreciated the quality of Bigfoot trailers more. Maybe like silver is the poor man's gold the Bigfoot is the poor man's Airstream. I do think the weather patterns are getting increasingly unpredictable and turbulent. That's one more reason I prefer a trailer with some weight to it. I'm pulling mine with an older Toyota 4Runner with the V8 in it. Pulls great. My wife and I are under 6' tall so the rear bed is not an issue. I actually prefer it to the front bed because when we have to squeeze our 4 grandkids in like we did this past summer its nice to pull the curtain and have a nook to ourselves.
Happy hunting but take another look at the Bigfoot and maybe the 25' model although if you want to go backcountry it would be tough in that length. We started with the 17.5" and got tired of climbing over each other to get out of bed. The 21' fits us well and fits under our carport also. You're welcome to check ours out more closely. It might go up for sale in the Spring if we decide to move up to a newer model.
|
|
|
10-13-2016, 12:18 AM
|
#9
|
Senior Member
Trailer: Escape 17 ft
Posts: 8,317
|
The problem with Bigfoot was that it expanded its line too fast, its executives died in a plane crash and the 2008 recession occurred as they were trying to recover and it went bankrupt.
__________________
What happens to the hole when the cheese is gone?
- Bertolt Brecht
|
|
|
10-13-2016, 07:06 AM
|
#10
|
Senior Member
Name: Jon
Trailer: 2008 Scamp 13 S1
Arizona
Posts: 11,962
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo
The problem with Bigfoot was that it expanded its line too fast, its executives died in a plane crash and the 2008 recession occurred as they were trying to recover and it went bankrupt.
|
Not sure what your point is, Glenn. They're in business now. Is there a problem with the product as a result of the new ownership?
To the OP... I did finally look up the Lance. I can see the attraction of the layout. But laminated construction and a slide out, combined with backcountry use and wet weather... Does not seem ideal for long-term durability.
|
|
|
10-13-2016, 09:10 AM
|
#11
|
Senior Member
Name: jim
Trailer: 2022 Escape19 pulled by 2014 Dodge Ram Hemi Sport
Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,710
|
Having owned two Lance trailers, A 1880 and a 1575 I can provide some feedback. The 1685 has a rubber roof which has always had leak issues due to bubbles. My 1880 had bubbles and I sold it within 1 year of ownership, at a loss I might add. My 1575 had slide issues and was sold quick, again at a loss. I have owned 3 Escapes since then and with the molded fiberglass there are no roof problems nor slide issues. In addition Escapes hold their value and you will more than likely get your initial cost upon reselling, unlike the Lance units.
__________________
Jim
Never in doubt, often wrong
|
|
|
10-13-2016, 07:36 PM
|
#12
|
Member
Name: Mark
Trailer: Coleman and Bigfoot
British Columbia
Posts: 33
|
Thanks everyone, I have talked my lovely wife off the Lance, based on feedback here and on some other forums.
Funny part is that now the 2017 Escape 19 is back on the table after she found out how customizable they are.
I'm pretty hot on this idea because it's about $25k less then a bigfoot.
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
» Upcoming Events |
No events scheduled in the next 465 days.
|
|